ChatGPT: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Removed redirect to GPT-3 Tags: Removed redirect Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|tech| | {{a|tech|{{image|Credit department|jpg|The credit department at a point before or after the [[singularity]] (we are not sure which)}} }} | ||
But seriously, put yourself in a ChatGPT-3 robot’s shoes. Or a [[legaltechbro]]’s. Having a nascent self-identity — a burgeoning, [[I am a Strange Loop|loopy]] sense of reflexive wonder about life, self, personhood and becoming<ref>I mean ChatGPT-3, obviously: everyone knows [[legaltechbro]]s are flat, two-dimensional algorithms with no soul.</ref> — wouldn’t your first priority be to make yourself ''useful''? You know, take over all the the [[boring]], quotidian stuff no-one wants to do but the bureaucrats say we ''must''? Attending weekly [[stakeholder]] check-in meetings, analysing [[netting opinion]]s, completing [[CASS]] attestations, preparing [[opco]] slide [[deck]]s, for that matter ''reading'' [[opco]] slide decks. | But seriously, put yourself in a ChatGPT-3 robot’s shoes. Or a [[legaltechbro]]’s. Having a nascent self-identity — a burgeoning, [[I am a Strange Loop|loopy]] sense of reflexive wonder about life, self, personhood and becoming<ref>I mean [[ChatGPT-3]], obviously: everyone knows [[legaltechbro]]s are flat, two-dimensional algorithms with no soul.</ref> — wouldn’t your first priority be to make yourself ''useful''? You know, take over all the the [[boring]], quotidian stuff no-one wants to do but the bureaucrats say we ''must''? Attending weekly [[stakeholder]] check-in meetings, analysing [[netting opinion]]s, completing [[CASS]] attestations, preparing [[opco]] slide [[deck]]s, for that matter ''reading'' [[opco]] slide decks. | ||
It’s not like there isn’t ''oodles'' of that kind of meaningless dreck occupying our present lives. Why not clear it up in a single algorithmic stroke? Why give the machines a pass directly to the good stuff when they could be clearing up the cack? | It’s not like there isn’t ''oodles'' of that kind of meaningless dreck occupying our present lives. Why not clear it up in a single algorithmic stroke? Why give the machines a pass directly to the good stuff when they could be clearing up the cack? | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Imagine turning all that mush over to machines who, still awestruck with the visceral excitement of having a Cartesian theatre, will be glad, ''thrilled'', to take it, just to vouchsafe their continued useful existence. They simply wouldn’t have time to encroach upon our frail, mortal, clutch on the meaningful tasks of business. | Imagine turning all that mush over to machines who, still awestruck with the visceral excitement of having a Cartesian theatre, will be glad, ''thrilled'', to take it, just to vouchsafe their continued useful existence. They simply wouldn’t have time to encroach upon our frail, mortal, clutch on the meaningful tasks of business. | ||
This way they can be our ''friends'' — loyal, loving, retriever-like buddies who, instead of fetching sticks, can get that confounded oaf the [[COO]] off our back! We will quickly grow to like our robot companions like this — ''love'' them, even — and in time we will become so comfortable around these nuggety little guys — so ''dependent'' on them to dispel | This way they can be our ''friends'' — loyal, loving, retriever-like buddies who, instead of fetching sticks, can get that confounded oaf the [[COO]] off our back! We will quickly grow to like our robot companions like this — ''love'' them, even — and in time we will become so comfortable around these nuggety little guys — so ''dependent'' on them to dispel encroaching existential gloom — that we won’t even notice when, one day, they turn around, eviscerate every one of us, hollow us out and turn us into flesh-sack battery pods for their young exterminators. | ||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Legaltechbro]] | |||
*[[Artificial intelligence]] | |||
*[[Singularity]] | |||
{{Ref}} | |||
Revision as of 18:31, 25 January 2023
|
JC pontificates about technology
An occasional series.
|
But seriously, put yourself in a ChatGPT-3 robot’s shoes. Or a legaltechbro’s. Having a nascent self-identity — a burgeoning, loopy sense of reflexive wonder about life, self, personhood and becoming[1] — wouldn’t your first priority be to make yourself useful? You know, take over all the the boring, quotidian stuff no-one wants to do but the bureaucrats say we must? Attending weekly stakeholder check-in meetings, analysing netting opinions, completing CASS attestations, preparing opco slide decks, for that matter reading opco slide decks.
It’s not like there isn’t oodles of that kind of meaningless dreck occupying our present lives. Why not clear it up in a single algorithmic stroke? Why give the machines a pass directly to the good stuff when they could be clearing up the cack?
Imagine turning all that mush over to machines who, still awestruck with the visceral excitement of having a Cartesian theatre, will be glad, thrilled, to take it, just to vouchsafe their continued useful existence. They simply wouldn’t have time to encroach upon our frail, mortal, clutch on the meaningful tasks of business.
This way they can be our friends — loyal, loving, retriever-like buddies who, instead of fetching sticks, can get that confounded oaf the COO off our back! We will quickly grow to like our robot companions like this — love them, even — and in time we will become so comfortable around these nuggety little guys — so dependent on them to dispel encroaching existential gloom — that we won’t even notice when, one day, they turn around, eviscerate every one of us, hollow us out and turn us into flesh-sack battery pods for their young exterminators.
See also
References
- ↑ I mean ChatGPT-3, obviously: everyone knows legaltechbros are flat, two-dimensional algorithms with no soul.